Re: Initial Structure
[email protected] (Graham Barr)
| Newsgroups | perl.bootstrap |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Yes IETF seem to go through I-D, RFC, STD but a published RFC is really treated like a standard. ie The working groups discuss I-D (Internet Drafts) which are published as RFCs when the WG agrees on them. So as not to confuse people that our RF is the same as IETFs RFC I think we should use a different term. Maybe RFD (Request For Discussion) Graham. On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 09:04:52PM -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote: > I always was confused by the term RFC (which I thought meant Request for > Comment) but it seems it has another meaning to the IETF, a standard. > > So perhaps we should > RFC v1 - Request For Comment > Go though the comment phase. > RFC v1.1 > repeat until ready > > till > > STD - Standard. >